The Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)-led government on Friday demanded Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial’s resignation after Supreme Court Justice Athar Minallah of the Supreme Court issued a dissenting note on the suo motu regarding the delay in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab elections.

In his 25-page long note, Justice Minallah agreed with dissenting notes of Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Jamal Khan Mandokhail, who earlier penned notes on the case, saying that the suo motu case was dismissed 4-3.

Shortly after the note was issued, Minister for Information and Broadcasting Marriyum Aurangzeb addressed a press conference and urged the CJP to step down, saying that the head of the top had become controversial.

“Athar Minallah’s decision not only raises a question on court proceedings but it also categorically states that he had not distanced, recused or disassociated himself from the bench.”

She further said that Justice Minallah had agreed with the verdict issued by his brother judges and declared the case to be inadmissible. She said that a verdict could not be issued on a matter that had been dismissed by a majority.

The information minister went on to say that the CJP had become “controversial” and should, therefore, resign.

PML-N Senior Vice President (SVP) Maryam Nawaz said that judges of “impeccable repute have raised serious questions on CJP’s conduct and bias” and also called on Justice Bandial to resign.

The demand comes a day after the National Assembly passed a resolution rejecting the three-member Supreme Court bench's "minority" verdict on the Punjab elections, making it binding on Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his cabinet not to implement the decision.

During the case in question, Justice Minallah was among the judges who rejected the suo motu notice taken by CJP Bandial regarding the delay in polls in KP and Punjab, on the advice of an SC bench hearing the Ghulam Mehmood Dogar case.

The CJP had formed a nine-member bench to hear the case, but two judges recused themselves, and the remaining four dismissed the case.

Justice Minallah's note reiterated that the "manner and mode" in which the proceedings were initiated had "unnecessarily" exposed the court to political controversies, eroding public confidence and prejudicing the rights of litigants with pending cases.